[Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: WILLIAM J. CLINTON (2000-2001, Book III)]
[October 28, 2000]
[Pages 2359-2361]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]
[[Page 2359]]
Statement on Signing the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug
Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2001
October 28, 2000
Today I am signing into law H.R. 4461, the Agriculture, Rural
Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act for FY 2001. I commend the Congress for presenting me
an acceptable version of this bill that provides critical funding for
our Nation's farmers and ranchers, improves the safety of our food
supply, and provides assistance to low-income families and rural
communities.
I am pleased that the Act fully funds my Food Safety Initiative at
$383 million, a $57 million, or 17 percent, increase over FY 2000. These
funds will improve food safety for all Americans by allowing the
Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Food and Drug Administration
(FDA) to increase surveillance activities and inspections of domestic
and imported food, accelerate responses to outbreaks, and perform vital
research on ways to reduce pathogens in food so that we can advance a
more science-based food inspection system. I also commend the Congress
for dropping the objectionable language provision that would have
prevented USDA from fully implementing the Egg Safety Action Plan that I
announced in December 1999. This will now allow USDA and FDA to
vigorously pursue the goal of cutting in half the number of salmonella
illnesses from eggs.
While the Congress did not provide the full amount of my requested
increase for the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women,
Infants, and Children, thereby failing to ensure that this vital program
can achieve the goal of 7.5 million participants, the program will be
able to serve a monthly average of just over 7.3 million individuals. I
am pleased that the Act adopts my proposal to expand the vehicle
allowance for the Food Stamp program, which will assist the many working
poor families for whom owning a vehicle is the one item that makes them
ineligible for food stamps. In addition, the Act will provide a much-
needed increase in nutrition assistance for low-income families with
high housing costs, by increasing the Food Stamp program housing
allowance. The two changes mean that families do not have to choose
among buying food, paying their housing costs, or having a more reliable
car. However, I am disappointed the bill did not restore food stamp
eligibility for certain legal immigrants, as proposed in my Budget.
Loans and grants for priority rural development programs will
increase under the Act to $9.9 billion this year, a $2.7 billion
increase over FY 2000. These funds will help diversify the rural
economy, improve the quality of life in rural communities, and bring
more rural areas across the ``economic divide'' that separates too many
parts of the country from the historic economic expansion underway. I am
especially pleased that the Act includes several of my proposals to
address geographic areas of rural America that have long struggled with
persistent poverty, including $34 million targeted to Indian
reservations for health clinics, child care centers, water systems, and
job opportunities; and $10 million for the Mississippi Delta Region to
create better job opportunities and strengthen local financial
intermediaries. The Act will also provide over $100 million in loans and
grants to help close the ``digital divide'' by financing local Internet
service and broadband transmission in rural areas.
The Act increases USDA's conservation technical assistance to
farmers and ranchers by over $50 million from the FY 2000 level. Part of
these funds will be used for a one-third increase in technical
assistance to producers who are improving their animal waste management
systems, as part of my Clean Water Action Plan. I am disappointed,
however, that the Act cuts financial assistance for these and other
conservation projects through the Environmental Quality Incentives
program, and provides none of the funds I requested for the Farmland
Protection Program that preserves farmland and helps communities manage
urban sprawl. Also, while it is certainly helpful that the Act increases
the Wetlands Reserve Program by 100,000 acres, it is far short of
reaching the 250,000 acres per year I proposed for this program. I am
hopeful that the next Congress and the next Farm Bill will recognize
that farmers were the first environmentalists and that Federal farm
programs
[[Page 2360]]
should be structured and funded to improve the environment while
boosting farm income.
I am also pleased that the Act provides vital payments to farmers
and ranchers who have suffered losses from natural disasters. However,
the more than $4 billion in emergency funds in this Act, combined with
more than $7 billion in farm assistance for the current crop year that
was enacted this summer, represents the third year in a row the Congress
has had to supplement farm income through major emergency
appropriations, due to the failure of the 1996 Farm Bill. I am hopeful
that the reforms enacted this year to the crop insurance program will
mitigate the need for future ad hoc crop loss legislation. I continue to
believe that USDA's farm income assistance program must be overhauled to
target funds to family farmers based on their actual income losses on
crops they are growing now, not paid out inordinately to corporate farms
based on what they grew years ago. My Administration is reviewing the
emergency funding provisions in this Act, and these funds will be
released as needs dictate.
I am concerned that the bill contains an ineffective provision
regarding importation of FDA-approved prescription drugs that represents
little more than a false promise to the American public. While I am
supportive of efforts to allow American consumers to gain access to
lower-cost prescription drugs, the language included in the Act contains
several loopholes that effectively render the provision meaningless.
Among other serious flaws, drug manufacturers can deny importers access
to FDA-approved labeling that is required for reimportation, and
therefore, drug companies are likely to block reimportation of their
medications. In addition, because this reimport authority expires after
5 years, private and public sector interest in investing in this system
will be limited. Not only does this provision fail to provide discounts,
it also does not address the larger issue of the lack of prescription
drug coverage for Medicare beneficiaries.
I am also concerned that language in this Act restricts
Presidential ability to initiate certain new agricultural and medical
trade sanctions and maintain old ones, as congressional approval of such
sanctions will now be required. This could disrupt the ability of the
President to conduct foreign policy, and could provide potential targets
of U.S. actions with time to take countermeasures. The bill permits
exports of U.S. farm and medical products to Cuba, but constrains these
trade opportunities by barring the U.S. Government, and severely
limiting U.S. private banks, from providing financing assistance to
Cuba. In addition, the legislation purports to restrict the President's
ability to authorize certain travel-related activities in Cuba. We are
concerned that this provision could be read to impose overly rigid
constraints on our ability to conduct foreign policy and respond to
immediate humanitarian and operational concerns including, inter alia,
protecting American lives, ensuring upkeep of American diplomatic
installations, and assisting in both Federal and State prosecutions in
the United States in which travel to Cuba may be required. We do not
think that the Congress intended to curtail such activities by this
legislation. Accordingly, my Administration will interpret this
provision, to the extent possible, as not infringing upon such
activities.
Also, I note that this bill will provide select U.S. industries
with a subsidy above and beyond the protection level needed to
counteract foreign subsidies, while providing no comparable subsidy to
other U.S. industries or to U.S. consumers, who are forced to pay higher
prices on industrial inputs or consumer goods as a result of the anti-
dumping and countervailing duties. I call on the Congress to override
this provision, or amend it to be acceptable, before they adjourn.
I am also concerned that this bill prohibits the Office of the
Under Secretary of Agriculture for Natural Resources and the Environment
from supervising, managing, or directing the Forest Service and the
Natural Resources Conservation Service. Policy disputes between the
Congress and the Administration should not degenerate into personal
attacks. Under Secretary Jim Lyons and his
office are essential to numerous national environmental, forestry, and
conservation initiatives, and have provided strong leadership in this
regard throughout my Administration.
There are a number of provisions in the Act that may raise
Constitutional issues. These provisions will be implemented in a manner
that is consistent with the Constitution:
Section 719 of the Act specifies that funds may not be used
to provide to any non-Department of Agriculture employee
questions or responses to questions resulting from the
appropriations hearing process. To the extent that this
provision would
[[Page 2361]]
interfere with my duty to ``take Care that the Laws be
faithfully executed,'' or impede my ability to act as the
chief executive, it would violate the Constitution, and I
will treat it as advisory.
Section 730 of the Act purports to constrain my ability to
make a particular type of budget recommendation to the
Congress. This provision would interfere with my
constitutional duty under the Recommendation Clause, and I
will treat it as advisory.
Finally, there are provisions in the Act that purport to
condition my authority or that of certain officers to use
funds appropriated by the Act on the approval of
congressional committees. My Administration will interpret
such provisions to require notification only, since any
other interpretation would contradict the Supreme Court
ruling in INS v. Chadha.
I urge the Congress to approve the remaining FY 2001 spending bills
expeditiously, and send them to me in an acceptable form.
William J. Clinton
The White House,
October 28, 2000.
Note: H.R. 4461, approved October 28, was assigned Public Law No.
106-387.